2. The judgment of the court below is acknowledged that all of the crimes of this case were led to confessions of all of the crimes of this case, the defendant repents of his mistake, and the defendant has no criminal records exceeding fines. However, in the case of the fraud of this case, it seems that the crime of this case was committed repeatedly over a considerable period of time for an unspecified number of victims, and the nature of the crime seems to have been excessive in light of the law and the frequency of the crime. In the case of the crime of this case, the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of negative measurement), the Road Traffic Act (Operation without License) and the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the same act has been repeated after arrest, and other various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence, the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., and other various sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is no evidence newly discovered in the course of the trial of sentencing of the court below, and the defendant's assertion against the defendant is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However) On May 19, 2014, the lower court’s part 8, 3, and 4, “On May 19, 2014, at around 00:25, the state of completing alcohol on the road front of the AMF located in the Gu-U.S.A.,” is clear that it is a clerical error of “AMF located in the Gu-U.S. A., AL’s AMF located in the Gu-U.S., and without obtaining a driver’s license,” and thus, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25